(721) ABHISHEK SRIDHAR DANTALA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 498A r/w Section 34 — Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(1)(w) — In a case involving allegations of caste-based harassment and abuse against a husband by his wife, the court considered whether to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant — Despite the serious accusations, the court granted bail with conditions — The marriage was a love marriage, which made caste-based abuse less likely India Law Library Docid # 2416392
(722) SRI CHETAN GOWDA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE BY KARNATAKA[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 307, 354, 506 and 34 — Interim Bail — Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail — The petitioners argued that the informant and his family have a history of committing offences and that the petitioners sustained injuries in the incident — The respondent produced a Wound Certificate showing the informant sustained grievous injuries — Anticipatory bail was denied for petitioner No.1 but granted for petitioner No.2 with conditions — The court found India Law Library Docid # 2416394
(723) SIDDARAJU @ SIDDANAYAKA @ SIDDANAYAKA Vs. STATE BY SARAGURU POLICE STATION[KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 376(2)(l) and 511 — Protection of Children from Sexual offences Act, 2012 — Sections 5(k) and 18 — The appellant was convicted for attempting to sexually assault a disabled girl, captured on video by her uncle — The appeal questioned the conviction under Sections 376(2)(l) and 511 of IPC and Sections 5(k) and 18 of POCSO Act, citing insufficient evidence, improper video handling, and non-compliance with Section 65-B of the Evidence Act — However, the trial court India Law Library Docid # 2416379
(724) STATE OF J&K THROUGH COMMISSIONER/SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS Vs. VIRENDER KOUL[JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Service Law — Promotion — The respondent was promoted from Laboratory Attendant to Electrician in 2000 — He challenged his promotion order and sought promotion to the post of Electronic Technician — Whether the respondent was entitled to be promoted to the post of Electronic Technician and whether the promotion of ‘I’ was valid — The respondent argued that he was more qualified and senior than ‘I’ who was promoted to the post of Electronic Technician India Law Library Docid # 2416516
(725) ABRAR AHMAD TANTRAY (21) Vs. STATE OF J&K THROUGH SECY AND OTHERS[JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Compensation — Electric Shock — The petitioner suffered severe injuries from an electric shock caused by a snapped 11 KV line when he was eight years old — This resulted in the amputation of his left arm and 78% permanent disability — The main issue is whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation and a suitable job from the respondents due to the injuries and permanent disability caused by the electric shock — The petitioner argues for compensation of Rs. 20.00 Lacs for medical expenses, p India Law Library Docid # 2416517
(726) NIRMALA Vs. SHIV LAL (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND OTHERS[PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 6 Rule 17 — Petitioner filed two civil revision petitions challenging orders from the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hisar — The case involves a dispute over land measuring 50 kanals in Hisar, part of which was acquired by the National Highway Authority of India — The main issues are the partial allowance of amendments to the plaint and the partial permission to produce additional evidence — Petitioner argued that the amendments and additional evidence we India Law Library Docid # 2416624
(727) VISHNUPAL SINGH RAWAT Vs. SAURAV KUMAR NAUTIYAL[UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 and 142 — The main issue is whether the complaint should be dismissed because it was initially filed without an application under Section 142 of the N.I. Act — The applicant argued that the complaint should be rejected outright as it was not supported by an application under Section 142 when initially filed —The respondent argued that the delay in filing the application under Section 142 was due to his mother's illness and subsequent death — The cou India Law Library Docid # 2417069
(728) AVDHESHACHARYA AND OTHERS Vs. DEVESTHAN COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT (JAIPUR BENCH)] 22-07-2024 Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959 — Sections 17 and 18 — The High Court ruled on a dispute regarding the Thikana Galta Ji temple and its properties — The court found that the appointment of the Mahant (head priest) is not hereditary but based on merit and selection by the State — The court also ruled that the properties of the temple belong to the idol of Thikana Galta Ji, and the Mahant is a caretaker and manager of the properties — The court set aside the self-claimed appointment of the Mahant India Law Library Docid # 2416232
(729) RAKESH MEHANDIRATTA (ARORA) Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS[RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 467, 468, 471, 409, and 120-B — Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Sections 13(1)(c)(d) and 13(2) — Quashing of FIR The petitioner argued that the impugned FIR was based on the same set of facts and allegations for which different FIRs were already lodged against him, and after thorough investigation, negative final reports were submitted by the investigating officers — The High Court agreed with the petitioner's arguments and quashed the impugned FIR, citing India Law Library Docid # 2416233
(730) FIROJ ALAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH[HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Sections 22 and 37 — The High Court dismissed a bail petition filed by a petitioner who was arrested for possession of a commercial quantity of Tramadol, a drug — The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to bail due to the rigours of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act, which applies to offences involving commercial quantity — The court also noted that the delay in the trial was not on the part of the prosecution or the court but on the p India Law Library Docid # 2416234
(731) SHASHANKA MAITI AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 406, 467 and 120B — The High Court has quashed the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioners in a criminal case — The court found that the petitioners were not named in the original FIR, nor were they served with a notice upon submission of the charge sheet six years later — The court also noted that the accused against whom the charge sheet was submitted were granted anticipatory bail — The court cited various Supreme Court authorities that emphasiz India Law Library Docid # 2416235
(732) SMT. SHYAMALI MONDAL AND ANOTHER Vs. SMT. RATNA NANDI AND ANOTHER[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166 — The High Court has modified the judgment and award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in a case involving a fatal road accident — The court held that the Insurance Company, despite being not liable due to the driver's lack of a valid license, should pay the compensation to the claimants (mother and wife of the deceased) and then recover the amount from the owner of the offending vehicle — The court took into consideration the helplessness of the India Law Library Docid # 2416236
(733) SARVESH KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS[CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Service Law — Fitment benefits — The High Court dismissed an appeal challenging a review petition that reversed a previous decision granting pay parity to Junior Engineering Assistants appointed after January 1, 2017 — The court found that the review petition was maintainable due to a mistake committed by the oil company's advocate in not submitting three crucial documents during the original writ petition — The court also held that the documents, which included a Record Note of Discussion and a India Law Library Docid # 2416237
(734) ZULFIKAR @ SHARUKH @ PLUMBER GAFFARBHAI ANSARI THRO ABDUL GAFFAR MUSLIM ANSARI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 — Sections 2(c), 3(1) and 135(1) — Detention — The High Court has quashed the detention order of a petitioner — The petitioner was detained based on three FIRs registered against him — The court held that the mere registration of FIRs cannot bring the case within the purview of the definition of "anti-social activity" under Section 2(c) of the Act — The court further emphasized that preventive detention cannot be used as a substitute for ord India Law Library Docid # 2416238
(735) UMAR YASIN SHAIKH THROUGH SABINA MOHAMMAD UMAR SHAIKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Gujarat Prevention of Antisocial Activities Act, 1985 — Sections 2(c) and 3(4) — Detention — The High Court has quashed the detention order who was detained as a "dangerous person" — The court held that the grounds of detention had no nexus to the "public order," but were purely a matter of law and order — The court referred to a decision of the Apex Court in Piyush Kantilal Mehta Vs. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, which clarified the distinction between "law and order" and "public order" — India Law Library Docid # 2416239
(736) KAMLESH @ BANTI PRATAPBHAI THAKOR THRO BALRAM PADAMSINGH PARIHAR Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND OTHERS[GUJARAT HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 — Sections 66(1b), 65(a)(e), 81, 98(2) and 116(b) — Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 — Section 3(1) — Detention — The High Court has quashed a detention order — The petitioner was detained on the grounds of registration of an FIR for offences under various sections of the Prohibition Act (old) — However, the court found that the detention order was not justified as the alleged anti-social activities did not have any nexus with the maintenance India Law Library Docid # 2416240
(737) RAVI Vs. THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 — Sections 4(1)(aaa) and 4(1-A)(ii) — Petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody for alleged offences under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act — Bail — The prosecution argued against granting bail, citing six previous cases of similar nature against the petitioner — P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560], which establishes the principle that if a person is released on bail by a higher court, the conditions imposed by the higher court shoul India Law Library Docid # 2416241
(738) SENDAMARAI AMMAL AND OTHERS Vs. DHARMAMURTHY RAO BAHADUR, CALAVALA CUNNAN CHETTY'S CHARITIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEES AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Section 106 — The case revolves around a suit filed by plaintiff against defendants for eviction from the property — The plaintiff is a public religious and charitable trust exempted from the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act — The defendants are tenants in the property and have been paying a monthly rent of Rs.800/- — The plaintiff decided to demolish and reconstruct the building to increase income and issued a notice under Section 106 of the T.P India Law Library Docid # 2416242
(739) KARAR AHAMED AND OTHERS Vs. SANKARA REDDY AND OTHERS[MADRAS HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Family Property Dispute — The plaintiff claimed a 1/3 share in the suit properties, alleging that an oral partition took place during the lifetime of their father dividing the properties among his sons — The court found that the plaintiff's case for partition of the suit properties based on an alleged oral partition during the lifetime of their father was not proved — The court also noted that the plaintiff had filed a separate suit for partition and separate possession of other family propertie India Law Library Docid # 2416243
(740) SH. RITESH KUMAR Vs. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY[DELHI HIGH COURT] 22-07-2024 Education Law — The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by petitioner, who sought to reinstate his admission in the program and de-register in accordance with the recommendations of a Special Committee meeting — The Academic Council of Jawaharlal Nehru University overturned the committee's recommendation, citing the student's violation of mandatory rules, including not completing the minimum two-year residency period and taking up employment outside Delhi before completing the resid India Law Library Docid # 2416219